Lieberman: Independent Bellwether?
By amba | Related entries in General Politics, Partisan HacksToday’s New York Sun column by John P. Avlon (subscribers only, free trial available), author of Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics, deals with the base stupidity (pun intended) of Democrats attempting a vicious ideological purge of a successful, popular, proven one of their own.
When a Democratic senator consistently gets 60% of the popular vote in a state with a moderate Republican heritage and Republican governors for the past 12 years, he should be considered a powerful asset. But if you’re one of the increasingly angry left-wing Democrats, you demonize him and then proceed with a primary.
That’s the position that a Connecticut senator and former vice presidential candidate, Joe Lieberman, finds himself in this year. Despite his more than 80% rating from Americans for Democratic Action and a low 20% rating from the American Conservative Union, he is being derided as a DINO – a Democrat In Name Only – by left-wing advocates and some party influencers, such as Howard Dean’s brother.
Amid President Bush’s increasing unpopularity in the state in which he was born (Mr. Bush was born in New Haven, Mr. Lieberman’s hometown), Mr. Lieberman’s support for the war on terrorism has made him persona non grata among left-wing Democrats. They have found their champion in a political neophyte and local businessman, Ned Lamont. One self identified Lamont delegate on the Daily Kos blog expressed the liberal rational for Mr. Lieberman’s replacement: “For years he has disparaged fellow Democrats and, time and again, provided a bi-partisan shield for Republicans’ harsh right-wing policies.”
And then, in the middle of Avlon’s column, comes this tantalizing tidbit:
Faced with this challenge, Mr. Lieberman’s recent statement that he would not rule out an independent candidacy if he loses the August primary set off waves of speculation. While it was an offhand comment, it underscores the fact that Mr. Lieberman could easily win as an independent. The two parties’ primaries are increasingly dominated by their more extremist voices, a situation unhealthy to the interests of a genuinely representative democracy.
Avlon goes on to talk about popular Republican moderates facing symmetrical ideological primary challenges from the right: Lincoln Chafee in Rhode Island, Congressman Joe Schwarz in Michigan. While the Club for Growth and pro-life groups are backing Chafee’s and Schwarz’s conservative opponents, Avlon notes that the same alliance failed to unseat moderate Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania. The moderate Republican Main Street Partnership has a fund-raising disadvantage relative to the passionate right, but is beginning to build a track record of backing winners like Specter. In a district with no Republican opponent, the conservative Club for Growth crossed over to support Texas Congressman Henry Cuellar, a fiscally conservative Democrat, in his successful primary fight against a left ideological candidate. Avlon concludes:
[True believers'] disproportionate influence in low-turnout primaries is yet another indication of the gap that exists between professional partisans and the general public. . . .
If centrist candidates like Mr. Lieberman are rejected by their party’s most activist elements and still run, the independent label may increasingly become a place of refuge for the sensible center, an opportunity to forge a new national consensus.
In other words, as both parties continue shrink and harden towards the extremes, centrist candidates and their many voters are increasingly being ejected or ejecting from the parties altogether. For the first time, it might be possible for independents in a wide range of races to begin winning elections.
This entry was posted on Friday, April 14th, 2006 and is filed under General Politics, Partisan Hacks. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
April 14th, 2006 at 9:52 am
This is one reason I see the low turnout at primaries to be a bad thing. How can we encourage more voters to participate in the early stages?
April 14th, 2006 at 10:44 am
When I was growing up in Minnesota, we had a moderate Republican Governor named Arnie Carlson. Unfortunately for him, while he was in office the Minnesota Republican Party took a hard-right turn; so much so, that Arnie lost the Republican primary during a reelection campaign. He then ran as a moderate, and trounced both the Democrat and the Republican contender in the state-wide campaign. But he didn’t remain an independent; he quickly made-up with his old party, and governed like a Republican.
The point is that just because a group of radicals takes over the primary process does not mean that the moderate candidate will suddenly become a true independent. If Lieberman did lose a primary but win the general election, that does not mean he wouldn’t act like a Democrat when taking office.
April 14th, 2006 at 11:32 am
Lieberman is RIGHT of his state, PLUS Lieberman bad mouths other dems and give the GOP cover. That is why they want rid of him.
April 14th, 2006 at 9:28 pm
PLUS Lieberman bad mouths other dems and give the GOP cover. That is why they want rid of him.
That’s pretty much it, right there. Joseph Leiberman is the John McCain of the Democratic Party, except that McCain is pretty much smack dab in the midle of the Republican Party, while Leiberman is pretty significantly to the right of the Democratic Party.
I think that his voting record looks a little better than his record of smack talk, but Leiberman is facing fire primarily for the smack talk, and secondarily for the rightward tilt of his politics.
April 14th, 2006 at 11:22 pm
I think the campaign to bring down Lieberman is regrettable, and will only weaken the Democrats’ hand (though it may strengthen that of the Kossacks, at least from their perspective). But that said, I understand their frustration with him. It’s not his voting record – they’ve been very clear about that – but his willingness to rhetorically stab his party in the back in order to further his own ambitions. This tendency was especially visible during his none-too-successful presidential bid.
The Democratic Party really needs to find its own Radical Middle – a third way of thinking that effectively unites its wings.
April 14th, 2006 at 11:23 pm
I should add that I think it may be best for both Lieberman and the Democrats if he did run as an independent. But then, we’ve been saying the same thing about McCain for years, right?
April 15th, 2006 at 11:15 am
Echoing Tom Strong, splitting the difference between Democrats and Republicans is not the answer. The center is the center. Those of us who are serious about developing a truly centrist politics cannot allow ourselves to be pulled off center by extremists who want to define reality on their distorted terms.
We can’t allow the political class to define reality for us, and no class in America has a more perverse view of what’s good for this country than the way it is seeen by the political cultures defined by the professionals in both parties. And in my view Lieberman (and Hillary, too) represents what’s worst in this culture. This guy doesn’t define the center; he’s simply a Democrat who for whatever reason has allowed himself to become an accomplice with some of the worst tendencies in the Republican program. He’s an accomodationist with extremism, not a man of the center.
April 17th, 2006 at 7:26 pm
To read more about moderate Republican Congressman John “Joe” Schwarz, R-Mich., see this blog: http://www.adrianinsider.blogspot.com
June 6th, 2006 at 2:12 pm
Senator Lieberman: Is he the right man for the Independent party?
In my opinion, he seems to be more like a member of the Republican Party. Close to the PNAC, Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, finally big supporter of the Iraq war…
I search the Internet on a daily basis and, by gully, there are a lot of references to Senator Lieberman, especially his readiness to go to war if a country “does not behave”.